Founded in 2002, Israeli NGO Zochrot focuses on raising awareness in Israeli society about the Nakba – the expulsion of 750,000 Palestinians during Israel’s creation in 1948.
By challenging dominant narratives and promoting dialogue about the region’s history, Zochrot, which means “remembering” in Hebrew, seeks to address the roots of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and envisions a shared, equal future. The group’s slogan is ‘From Nakba to Return’.
In 2009, Israel’s education ministry banned the use of the word ‘Nakba’ in schoolbooks used by Palestinian citizens of Israel, while the ‘Nakba Law’ of 2011 authorised Israel’s finance ministry to withdraw state funding from institutions that commemorate the ethnic cleansing of 1948.
At the beginning of this year, the German Foreign Office decided to pull funding from Zochrot and another Israeli NGO New Profile, a volunteer-based movement offering support to conscientious objectors who risk imprisonment in Israel.
The New Arab met with Rachel Beitarie, the current director, to discuss Zochrot’s work.
The New Arab: Zochrot plays a central role in preserving and promoting the memory of the Nakba within Israeli society, where this topic is often marginalised. What motivates your work and what challenges do you face?
Rachel Beitarie: What motivates our work, I would say, is truth-telling and confronting the darker chapters of our own history. The Nakba is Palestinian history, but it is also Israeli history – something you can’t really escape and shouldn’t ignore. We’ve been an active organization for 23 years now. The founders of the organisation were mostly Israelis committed to human rights and peace. They were so-called peace activists, very active and involved in peace and dialogue circles, which were quite popular during the 1990s and early 2000s, following the Oslo Agreement. But they saw that this agreement was collapsing.
Gradually, and mainly through learning from our Palestinian friends and colleagues, they realized that efforts – whether on a state level or even on a personal or group level – to foster dialogue and peace almost always hit a brick wall. This happens because the two sides aren’t even talking about the same things and aren’t being honest – especially the Israeli side, which hasn’t been honest about its willingness to explore the roots of the problem, which is the Nakba: the expulsion of most of the Palestinian people in 1948 from what became the State of Israel.
In peace circles, we would often talk about the occupation of 1967 and the military regime over the Palestinian territories, which are, of course, very significant problems. However, they are a continuation of the great expulsion of 1948 and the dispossession of Palestinians that has persisted ever since. Until we address the root of the problem, we cannot truly move forward or seek solutions. And until we recognise the existence of millions of Palestinian refugees – most of whom remain stateless to this day – we cannot resolve the current situation. Not only can we not solve it, but the oppression and dispossession of Palestinians continue.
This is what we, and Palestinians, call the ongoing Nakba. We have sadly witnessed its culmination over the past 15 months. The inability or unwillingness to critically examine this country’s past, present, founding myths, and the continuation of this violence has, very tragically, led first to the Hamas attack on 7 October and then to everything that has followed. This includes the attacks on Gaza, the killing of tens of thousands of Palestinians, the starvation, torture, dispossession, and the creation of millions of new refugees.
|
|
What do you mean when you say Israelis and Palestinians aren’t speaking about the same thing? What are the roots of the problem from the mainstream Israeli perspective?
For most of what we would call the Israeli peace camp until not too long ago, the root of the problem was seen as the occupation of 1967 – when Israel occupied the West Bank, Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. The Golan Heights is a slightly different story, but it’s still connected.
Since then, the prevailing logic has been the two-state solution, based on separation. Many on the Israeli left have opposed settlements in the West Bank – and rightfully so -but they often fail to see the connection, though I think it’s very clear. The practices of settlement in the West Bank – land confiscation, arrests and incarceration, dispossession of Palestinians from their lands, preventing their access to those lands, and family separations – all of these existed before 1967.
In fact, the practices of land grabbing began even before 1948, going back to the early days of the Zionist movement. It’s a continuation of the same practices and the same logic: gradually take over as much of Palestine as possible, expel Palestinians when feasible, and, when it isn’t politically possible, confine them to smaller and smaller areas.
What approaches does Zochrot use to familiarise Israelis with the history of the Nakba? How does the Israeli public respond to your educational programs and events?
It’s difficult because this is such a taboo subject. Israelis, I think, often want to believe that they are rightfully living here, that our ancestors – our grandparents or even parents, for many of us – built this land as honest and good people. And maybe they were, in some respects. Confronting the Nakba is hard because it challenges the very founding myth of the State of Israel.
We grow up being taught that people came to their ancestral land. Even for secular Israelis who don’t believe in a divine promise, the idea of returning to the land of our forefathers is deeply ingrained. It’s tied to the belief that this was a land without a people for a people without a land.
That idea is essentially the founding myth of this country. It’s the story we’re told from the day we are born as Israelis. It’s a very powerful and compelling narrative, and it’s not easy to come to terms with the fact that it’s ultimately just a story. I think it’s a pretty difficult journey because it forces you to reexamine the very foundations of your education, your family connections, and the way you grew up – and to come to terms with all of that.
Of course, the responses are sometimes hostile. In some cases, they remain hostile, but in others, you see people starting to think. Over the years, Zochrot has engaged with many thousands of Israelis, and you can see how many of them have shifted politically, opened their eyes to the facts of the Nakba and Palestinian dispossession, and truly changed their views. I include myself in this group. I grew up as a Zionist, and Zochrot – long before I became an employee – played a huge role in opening my eyes to the realities of this place I call home, to where and how I was raised.
|
|
You mentioned that responses can sometimes be hostile. What kind of hostilities have you encountered?
Sometimes, we face verbal hostilities. A lot of our activities take place in public spaces, where we do tours. In the past, many of these tours took place in open areas, and people would sometimes join and start arguing passionately, accusing us of lying or not telling the truth. Occasionally, we’d just randomly encounter such reactions, and people would get very upset by what they were hearing.
This would sometimes escalate verbally, and occasionally even beyond that, with attempts to tear down signs or disrupt our activities. There are also many disparaging responses in the media and on social media. But honestly, it’s nothing compared to what Palestinians experience here. Of course, we have to continue to tell the truth, even if it provokes some people.
Germany recently decided to halt funding to Zochrot. How has the organisation responded to this decision, and what impact does it have on your ongoing work, particularly in relation to your educational programs, public outreach, and efforts to promote the memory of the Nakba in Israel?
The impact is significant, and we’re still figuring out how to absorb it because it’s a serious cut in funds. It represented roughly a quarter of our annual budget. We’ll need to find other sources of income. This impact will require some restructuring, but it’s not something that will stop us from what we’re doing. We will continue to educate and open people’s eyes, because that’s our mission and our commitment.
We responded to this by issuing a statement. Here we address the German government’s decision to cut financial and staff support for Zochrot, and we criticise this decision. The statement highlights the right of return as a matter of international law and criticizes the German government’s suppression of Palestinian voices.
Were there direct discussions or explanations from German authorities regarding this funding halt?
No, there were no direct explanations, nor was the funding decision thoroughly explained. We were informed by KURVE Wustrow, our German partner organisation, that this financial and staff support will be terminated due to a government decision, despite their best efforts to maintain it.
There were discussions in 2024 where we were asked to provide more details about our activities, what we’re doing, and about our stance on supporting a Jewish and democratic state. However, there was never a clear argument given for the defunding decision. We were not provided with a reason, so we can only speculate.
|
|
How do you see the connection between the funding halt and Germany’s political stance on Israel and Palestine?
I believe there is a strong alignment here. Of course, the German government has the right to fund or not fund any organisations it chooses. But I see this decision as very much in line with Germany’s unconditional support for the State of Israel, particularly as it continues its crimes in Gaza and its broader actions against Palestinians. As the Israeli government becomes more extreme and Israeli discourse shifts further right, Germany continues to provide military assistance and a diplomatic shield for all of this.
Withdrawing support from organisations pushing for a democratic discourse within Israeli society aligns with the Israeli government’s lack of interest in that kind of change. Again, while we don’t have an inherent right to German funding, it’s telling that the German government claims to promote peace, understanding, and even a feminist foreign policy. Yet, when it comes to Palestine and Israel, it cuts funding to the very organizations that advocate for justice, promote honest discussions, and challenge the militaristic and almost fascist discourse and actions in Israel.
Cutting funds to us and New Profile, promoting demilitarisation within Israeli society, as well as cutting funds to several Palestinian human rights organisations, speaks volumes. They may claim to be promoting peace, but in reality, they are stifling the work of peacebuilders in Israel-Palestine. I think these actions speak for themselves.
Zochrot is advocating for the right of return for Palestinians, which means that Palestinian refugees and their descendants should have the right to return to the homes and land they were forced to leave in 1948. This seems to have been one of the reasons for the halt in funding from Germany. How does Zochrot view this connection, and what role does the right of return play in your efforts to promote the memory of the Nakba and encourage reconciliation?
Just to be clear, we don’t just promote the right of return – Palestinian refugees have a right to return. Every day they are prevented from realising this right is an infringement of basic human rights. What we are promoting, especially within Israeli society and sometimes beyond, is an understanding of what the right of return means, along with a political imagination that allows us to think about what this place can be and how it can accommodate both returning refugees and those who already live here.
Of course, we do not believe that redressing the wrongs of 1948 requires committing another wrong today. Another mass expulsion – whether of Palestinians or Israeli Jews – is unacceptable to us. The solution lies in finding ways for all of us to live together. And that, for us, is the meaning of the right of return: rebuilding and reimagining a shared existence here, one that isn’t separate but connected. People have been imagining and practicing this coexistence since before Zionism. Jews lived with Arabs, with Palestinians. Jews were Palestinians before Zionism. Just as there are Muslim and Christian Palestinians, there were Jewish Palestinians.
So, we’re talking about a logic of connection rather than separation. We’re talking about return as a means of rebuilding this place into one that is equal and free for all its people. That’s all we’re advocating for. For some reason, this is considered radical, though to me, it’s simply about basic human rights. The right of refugees to return home should be a very basic understanding.
My mother was born in Austria and came to Palestine as a refugee when she was two years old. As the director of Zochrot, a political activist, and the daughter of a refugee, I believe that the voice advocating for the right of return must exist everywhere, particularly within Israeli society. Because, if we’re not talking about this, we’re not addressing the root causes of the problems we’re facing today. And you don’t have to look far – just look at Gaza. The Gaza Strip was created as a result of the Nakba, formed alongside the state of Israel as an enclosed area filled with refugees from other places.
All the violence and bloodshed stem from these basic facts. Until there is a just solution for the refugees in Gaza and elsewhere, I don’t believe a real solution is possible. Not everyone has to agree with me, but we should at least talk about it. The fact that the German government considers even mentioning the right of return a taboo – that educating and talking about this basic right is seen as a threat to the state of Israel – says a lot.
If a state cannot exist without oppressing an entire people, then perhaps it doesn’t deserve the support it’s receiving. Maybe Germany should reconsider this support and reflect on what it really means. When they say they support Israel, are they supporting the people who live here – Jewish people like me, Palestinian people – or are they supporting an Israeli government, no matter how extreme it becomes?
|
|
Given the sheer scale of the destruction in Gaza and the level of resentment towards Palestinians in Israeli society, particularly after 7 October, what sort of goals does Zochrot have long-term?
Our goals remained the same, but they’ve become even more urgent in light of the current catastrophe. We have to talk about the core issue. We have to address the root of the problem. We cannot go back to the status quo before 7 October 2023, where every couple of years there was an attack on Gaza, some attacks from Gaza towards civilians in Israel, and an exchange of fire, with hundreds or thousands of people killed in Gaza, only to return to some kind of ‘normal’ where the siege on Gaza continues, pretending it isn’t there. This is how things went here for almost 20 years. The refusal to engage with an actual solution brought us to this point.
For us, it is very important to promote even harder a discourse that looks at the problem from its roots – from 1948, the Nakba, and the right of return as a redress for the Nakba and a way to build or grow a society here that is equal, free, and shared by all the people who live here.
Do you ever find yourself losing hope?
Yes, many times every day. But I see hope less as something I either have or don’t have, and more as something I try to practice every day. Telling the truth and hearing the truth from Palestinians gives me a lot of hope. The ability within Zochrot – where we’re a team of Israelis and Palestinians – to forge these connections, be honest with each other, and build really strong bonds that have withstood, and continue to withstand, very difficult times gives me hope. If we can do this on a small scale, it can be done on a larger scale as well.
I talk to people every day, including Israelis. I’ve seen people change their minds, open their eyes to the truth of their existence here, and their own histories. They then make the decision to act on it, to act differently, and maybe teach others, telling the truth to their own circles and engaging with this material. So, I don’t just think it’s possible – I know it is. That’s the practice of hope: telling the truth and maintaining connections.
Elias Feroz studied Islamic religion and history as part of his teacher training programme at the University of Innsbruck in Austria. Elias also works as a freelance writer and focuses on a variety of topics, including racism, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, the politics of history, and the culture of remembrance
Follow him on X: @FerozElias
